Ten policies for pollinators

Dicks, Lynn V.; Viana, Blandina Felipe; Bommarco, Riccardo; Brosi, Berry J.; Arizmendi, Marı́a del Coro; Cunningham, Saul A.; Galetto, Leonardo; Hill, Rosemary; Lopes, Ariadna Valentina; Pires, C. S. S.; Taki, Hisatomo; Potts, Simon G.

doi:10.1126/science.aai9226

Cited by 164 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…provide vital ecosystem services as pollinators of native plant species and agricultural crops (Kearns and Inouye ). However, many bumble bee species are declining across the Northern Hemisphere because of factors that are often inter‐related and include habitat loss and fragmentation (Goulson et al , Koh et al ), agricultural practices (Carvell , Williams and Osborne , Dicks et al ), altered fire regimes (Taylor and Catling ), disease (Cameron et al , Koch and Strange ), and climate change (Potts et al , Kerr et al , Miller‐Struttmann et al ). With declines of bumble bees attributed in part to habitat loss (Goulson et al , Koh et al ), understanding how habitat characteristics influence bumble bee abundance and diversity may help guide land management efforts towards improving habitat for bumble bees and other pollinators (Goulson et al ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bumble bee use of post‐fire chaparral in the central Sierra Nevada

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bumble bees (Bombus spp.) are declining across many regions in the Northern Hemisphere, leading to a need for management actions that will protect and enhance their habitats. In the Sierra Nevada of California, USA, montane chaparral is prevalent across the landscape, particularly after forest fires, and may provide important floral resources for pollinators. However post‐fire montane chaparral is often targeted for removal during reforestation efforts, to reduce competition with young trees. In 2015 and 2016, we conducted non‐lethal bumble bee surveys within 2 areas in the Sierra Nevada that burned in forest fires in 2004. Our goals were to describe bumble bee abundance and species richness in a post‐fire landscape, to compare results from chaparral‐dominated upland vegetation with results from interspersed patches of riparian vegetation, and to identify characteristics of individual chaparral stands that might make some stands more valuable to bumble bees than others. We captured 2,494 bumble bees of 12 species, and used Bayesian hierarchical modeling to determine that bumble bee abundance was substantially greater in riparian plots (modeled capture rate truex¯ = 1.10 ± 0.31 [SD] bees/survey in 2015, and 2.96 ± 0.83 bees/survey in 2016) than in upland plots (truex¯ = 0.47 ± 0.07 bees/survey in 2015, and 1.27 ± 0.18 bees/survey in 2016), which comprised a mix of chaparral shrubs and associated herbaceous plants. Modeled species richness was also greater in riparian plots, with an average mean richness of 4.1 ± 1.8 bumble bee species in riparian plots versus 2.3 ± 1.3 species in upland plots across the 2 years of the study. Within upland and riparian areas, plots dominated by herbaceous vegetation had greater abundance and species richness. One chaparral shrub species, bearclover (Chamaebatia foliolosa), was foraged on preferentially over all other shrub species and over all but 1 forb taxon, and was associated with increased occupancy probability in the Vosnesensky bumble bee (Bombus vosnesenskii), the most abundant bumble bee species on our study plots. A complex of closely related herbaceous species in the genus Phacelia, commonly associated with upland chaparral in our study area, was the plant taxon most frequently used by bumble bees, and appeared to be particularly important during mid‐summer after bearclover flowers became scarce. Our findings suggest that post‐fire chaparral communities are generally less intensively used by bumble bees than nearby riparian vegetation but may nevertheless provide important habitat. When chaparral removal is part of post‐fire forest regeneration strategies, bumble bees will likely benefit from retention of a mosaic of upland habitat patches dominated by herbaceous vegetation and, in our study area, bearclover, which may provide foraging resources throughout the life cycle of local bumble bee colonies. Because habitat characteristics affected the occupancy of individual bumble bee species differently, managers should consider foraging preferences of target bumble ...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bumble bee use of post‐fire chaparral in the central Sierra Nevada

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The IPBES report suggested that 'ecological intensification' Tittonell 2014) is a key mitigation strategy, and claimed it could transform agriculture to support pollinators, pollination services and food production. Its emphasis on managing beneficial biodiversity to maintain or enhance agricultural productivity is particularly appropriate in the context of global policy objectives to achieve greater food security in a changing world (Dicks et al 2016a;IPBES 2016). Here, we examine the IPBES report's claim in detail, critically evaluating the potential of ecological intensification to mitigate the negative effects of conventional agricultural intensification (industrial management of large-scale monocultures with high chemical inputs) on pollinators and pollination, at landscape (land use) and local (land management) scales.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological intensification to mitigate impacts of conventional intensive land use on pollinators and pollination

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Worldwide, human appropriation of ecosystems is disrupting plant-pollinator communities and pollination function through habitat conversion and landscape homogenisation. Conversion to agriculture is destroying and degrading semi-natural ecosystems while conventional land-use intensification (e.g. industrial management of large-scale monocultures with high chemical inputs) homogenises landscape structure and quality. Together, these anthropogenic processes reduce the connectivity of populations and erode floral and nesting resources to undermine pollinator abundance and diversity, and ultimately pollination services. Ecological intensification of agriculture represents a strategic alternative to ameliorate these drivers of pollinator decline while supporting sustainable food production, by promoting biodiversity beneficial to agricultural production through management practices such as intercropping, crop rotations, farm-level diversification and reduced agrochemical use. We critically evaluate its potential to address and reverse the land use and management trends currently degrading pollinator communities and potentially causing widespread pollination deficits. We find that many of the practices that constitute ecological intensification can contribute to mitigating the drivers of pollinator decline. Our findings support ecological intensification as a solution to pollinator declines, and we discuss ways to promote it in agricultural policy and practice.

show abstract

“…Many pesticides used in agriculture are harmful, not only to target pests, but also to beneficial arthropods, including pollinating bees 1 . Some pesticides such as acaricides are purposely placed into honey bee colonies for Varroa control.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of coumaphos and imidacloprid on honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) lifespan and antioxidant gene regulations in laboratory experiments

Gregorc

Alburaki

Rinderer

et al. 2018

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of this study was to test comparatively the effects of two common insecticides on honey bee Apis mellifera worker’s lifespan, food consumption, mortality, and expression of antioxidant genes. Newly emerged worker bees were exposed to organophosphate insecticide coumaphos, a neonicotinoid imidacloprid, and their mixtures. Toxicity tests were conducted along with bee midgut immunohistological TUNEL analyses. RT-qPCR assessed the regulation of 10 bee antioxidant genes linked to pesticide toxicity. We tested coumaphos at 92,600 ppb concentration, in combination with 5 and 20 ppb imidacloprid. Coumaphos induced significantly higher bee mortality, which was associated with down regulation of catalase compared to coumaphos and imidacloprid (5/20 ppb) mixtures, whereas, both imidacloprid concentrations independently had no effect on bee mortality. Mixture of coumaphos and imidacloprid reduced daily bee consumption of a control food patty to 10 mg from a coumaphos intake of 14.3 mg and 18.4 and 13.7 mg for imidacloprid (5 and 20) ppb, respectively. While coumaphos and imidacloprid mixtures induced down-regulation of antioxidant genes with noticeable midgut tissue damage, imidacloprid induced intensive gene up-regulations with less midgut apoptosis.

show abstract

Ten policies for pollinators

Cited by 164 publications

References 13 publications

Bumble bee use of post‐fire chaparral in the central Sierra Nevada

Bumble bee use of post‐fire chaparral in the central Sierra Nevada

Ecological intensification to mitigate impacts of conventional intensive land use on pollinators and pollination

Effects of coumaphos and imidacloprid on honey bee (Hymenoptera: Apidae) lifespan and antioxidant gene regulations in laboratory experiments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About